Menu

A great WordPress.com site

Master Misleader Obama: The Artful Dodger in the White House

The President of the United States, Barrack Hussein Obama, must think the world is full of idiots that can be misled and will believe whatever he says, like the people who elected him in two elections. The world, however, is not composed of racists who are bent upon retaliation or entitlement compensation for all their perceived injustices. Nor does it consist of people who are consumed with an attractive face or proving they are not racists. Obama may be able to fool some of the people in the United States all of the time, and fool all of them some of the time, but he cannot fool all of the people all of the time! Nor can he fool the world any of the time!

It was bad enough when the world watched the people of the United States elect an obscure unknown without vetting him. Simply because he was ‘half African’ he won certification as the first “black” post racist president. He won certification by the DNC as being qualified as a candidate for President of the United States simply because he was allegedly born in the United States; an “anchor baby“. Because of being born on US soil, he could have been conceived and raised by two foreign national parents who were felons in other nations. Despite the fact the Constitution makes the specific distinction between the President and Vice-President, as opposed to any other elective office, as being required to be “natural born“. The architects of our nation believed some concepts to be fundamental and universally understood (not requiring definition) like “natural born” meaning the child of two citizen parents; and “marriage” meant wedlock between a man and a woman. Little did the members of Congress know, in 1776, “progressive” citizens of the contemporary USA would not know the definition of “natural born” or “marriage”. Perhaps the definition of “father” no longer means a male parent, or the definition of “mother” no longer means a female parent!

In view of the fact the United States government has passed the Voting Rights Act and the 14th and 15th amendments, it’s no small wonder that the legislators and legislation in this country have degenerated to the point where mediocrity would be an improvement. Voting rights do not require intelligence, civic education, or any kind of investment in electoral outcomes. There are no constraints to ensure those who vote are even qualified to vote. Neither is there any requirements to ensure that one is even a citizen and/or assures one vote for one person. There is cavalier management of ballot certification and counting which presents many opportunities for undetected abuses. I think it’s reasonable to believe there are those who would allow foreigners to vote if it would benefit them or their interests.

In this deplorable degeneration of the high ideals and dreams of the Revolutionary leaders of this country, we now find ourselves with a half-American, half-African, pseudo-intellectual who is hell bent on retaliation for all the social injustices he perceives in the United States and throughout the world. Although he claims to be Christian, his only known Christian association was with the racist ministry of Jeremiah Wright. If a person evaluated his spiritual beliefs based upon his attitudes and behaviors, rather than the words of his mouth (which have, more often than not, proven to be opportunistic if not outright mendacious), anyone would easily see his predisposition and favor for Islam. This combined with his racism and retaliatory attitudes subscribed to from his Kenyan dissenter father, has fostered his radical and dangerous foreign policy decisions advancing the cause of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda.

With his military intervention in support of the Libyan uprising against Muammar Gaddafi Obama granted rebel Muslim Extremists access to the weapons depositories of this dictator who had been maintaining a relatively peaceful disposition with the West. Not only were the rebels granted access to conventional weapons stores, but any and all chemical weapons and fabrication facilities which had escaped the supervision of United Nations oversight. In view of the slaughter of the United States’ ambassador and staff members in Benghazi, and the subsequent non-disclosure and cover-up of the factual circumstances surrounding this travesty, one can only wonder where the Gaddafi weapons stores went. The possibility of them falling into the hands of Syrian rebels cannot be excluded.

Then, not altogether dissimilar to Obama’s unnecessary, but capriciously injected racist remarks concerning the Zimmerman-Trayvon tragedy, the president injected his remarks concerning the Syrian “red line”, which he now seeks to deny with allegations he was referring to an international “Red Line”. The facts, however, do not bear out Obama’s denials and actual remarks:

“We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.” – Obama, August 20, 2012

“I didn’t set a red line. The world set a red line.” – Obama, Sept. 4, 2013

If the “world set the red line” regarding chemical weapons and appropriate response to their use, why didn’t the UN vote to condemn the much more massive use of chemical weapons to perpetrate genocide against the Iraqi Kurds? In August 1988 the United Nations Sub-Committee on Human Rights voted by 11 votes to 8 not to condemn Iraq for human rights violations. Despite the lack of evidence to support Obama’s allegation regarding the world setting the “red line”, what Obama’s remark did accomplish was giving the rebels an opportunity for clandestine use of Libyan or Iraqi chemical agents against Syrians while simultaneously proffering an opportunity to blame Assad for crossing Obama’s “red line”. Based upon a history of brutal and barbarian slaughter by the Al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood mercenaries, their opportunistic use of chemical weapons is neither inconceivable or illogical. On the other hand, the use of these weapons against his own people with so few reported rebel casualties when Assad was prevailing against the rebels and in defiance of Obama’s “red line” would be neither reasonable nor rational. August 21, 2013 chemical weapons were used and Obama immediately responded by his decision to use military intervention in response.

Then the Russian President, Putin, proposed that Syria turn their weapons over to global supervision. The Syrians were agreeable. These diplomatic proposals for resolving the Syrian issues were in sharp contrast to Obama’s Chicago-thug type diplomacy with military intervention. Obama claims that the primary goal of military intervention is preservation of national security by containment of chemical weapons from terrorist access. If that were the truthful objective, why is Obama supporting Al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood terrorists who will gain control of any chemical agents, weapons, or manufacturing facilities in Syria if and when they prevail against Assad. Now, after the nation and the world have expressed vigorous opposition to Obama’s treasonous efforts to aid and abet enemies of the United States, Obama claims his efforts to defy Russia, China, Iran, and other global powers were crucial to initiating discussion of diplomatic options. If Obama had ever had any intention of diplomatic resolution to the Syrian civil war, he would never have made his “red line” invitation to the Syrian rebels to perpetrate a fraudulent chemical attack and then, when it occurred, immediately respond with a decision to use military intervention.

Bottom line: Obama is not a friend to the peace and security of the United States of America. He has family ties to hostile enemy ideologies as well as a known history of education and training in ideology hostile to United States interests. He is a clear advocate and sympathizer with racist aggression. He is supporting and advocating ideologies and foreign interests hostile to United States economic and political security. Allowing Obama to continue upon the path he is following is a clear and present danger to the national interests of the United States of America which transcends any past impeachable offenses brought forth against any previous US President!